Tongwu Yu, Chuanwei Ding
Capital University of Physical Education And Sports, Beijing, China.
Anhui Communications Vocational & Technical College, Hefei, China.
Front Physiol. 2025 Mar 20;16:1551645. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2025.1551645. eCollection 2025.
The "no pain, no gain" philosophy has long influenced athletic training approaches, particularly in high-intensity workouts like metabolic resistance training (MRT). However, the necessity of discomfort-inducing training for optimal athletic performance remains debatable. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined whether MRT provided comparable or better results than traditional training methods in trained athletes.
A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus (January 2004 - December 2024) identified RCTs comparing MRT with traditional training in athletes. Two reviewers screened studies and assessed bias risk using Cochrane RoB 2. Random - effects meta - analyses were conducted for outcomes like VO2max, peak power, sprint performance, blood lactate, time to exhaustion, and jump height. GRADE was used to evaluate evidence certainty.
Eleven studies (n = 276 participants) met inclusion criteria. MRT demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in sprint performance (SMD = 1.18, 95% CI: 0.00 to 2.36, p < 0.0001) and countermovement jump height (SMD = 0.80, 95% CI: -0.04 to 1.64, p = 0.0007), indicating notable gains in explosive power. VO2max improvements were observed (SMD = 0.30, 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.79, p = 0.10) but did not reach statistical significance. Peak power output showed a moderate but non-significant positive effect (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: -2.05 to 3.13, p = 0.55), while blood lactate changes varied widely (SMD = -1.68, 95% CI: -8.58 to 5.22, p = 0.29), reflecting high heterogeneity across studies. Time to exhaustion presented a small positive effect (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.46, p = 0.18), but without statistical significance. Subgroup analyses revealed that younger adults (19-25 years) and experienced athletes benefited the most from MRT, with low-frequency training (≤2 sessions/week) yielding the most favorable adaptations. Moderator analysis confirmed that sprint performance had the strongest response to MRT, while aerobic measures exhibited more variability.
The evidence demonstrates the capacity of MRT to enhance athletic performance comparable to or exceeding traditional training methods while requiring reduced time commitment. These findings suggest that optimal performance adaptations can be achieved through well-designed MRT protocols without necessitating excessive training volumes.
https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-11-0024, identifier: 36 INPLASY2024110024.
“不劳无获”的理念长期以来一直影响着运动训练方法，尤其是在诸如代谢阻力训练（MRT）这样的高强度训练中。然而，为了实现最佳运动表现而进行诱发不适训练的必要性仍存在争议。本系统评价和荟萃分析探讨了在受过训练的运动员中，MRT是否能产生与传统训练方法相当或更好的效果。
对PubMed/MEDLINE、科学网、Scopus和SPORTDiscus进行系统检索（2004年1月至2024年12月），以确定比较MRT与传统训练的随机对照试验（RCT）。两名评审员筛选研究，并使用Cochrane RoB 2评估偏倚风险。对最大摄氧量、峰值功率、短跑成绩、血乳酸、疲劳时间和跳跃高度等指标进行随机效应荟萃分析。采用GRADE评估证据的确定性。
11项研究（n = 276名参与者）符合纳入标准。MRT在短跑成绩（标准化均数差[SMD]=1.18，95%置信区间[CI]：0.00至2.36，p<0.0001）和反向移动跳跃高度（SMD = 0.80，95% CI：-0.04至1.64，p = 0.0007）方面显示出统计学上的显著改善，表明爆发力有显著提高。观察到最大摄氧量有所改善（SMD = 0.30，95% CI：-0.19至0.79，p = 0.10），但未达到统计学显著性。峰值功率输出显示出中等但不显著的正向效应（SMD = 0.54，95% CI：-2.05至3.13，p = 0.55），而血乳酸变化差异很大（SMD = -1.68，95% CI：-8.58至5.22，p = 0.29），反映出各研究间存在高度异质性。疲劳时间呈现出小的正向效应（SMD = 0.23，95% CI：0.00至0.46，p = 0.18），但无统计学显著性。亚组分析显示，年轻人（19 - 25岁）和有经验的运动员从MRT中获益最大，低频训练（≤2次/周）产生的适应性最有利。调节分析证实，短跑成绩对MRT的反应最强，而有氧指标表现出更大的变异性。
证据表明，MRT能够提高运动表现，与传统训练方法相当或超过传统训练方法，同时所需的训练时间更少。这些发现表明，通过精心设计的MRT方案可以实现最佳的性能适应，而无需过多的训练量。
https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2024-11-0024，标识符：INPLASY2024110024。
